Clinton Heads To Afghanistan As U.S. War Fears Grow

MATTHEW LEE   07/17/10 07:06 PM ET   AP

Hillary Clinton

WASHINGTON — Amid growing concerns about the war in Afghanistan, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is heading to South Asia on a mission aimed at refining the goals of the nearly 9-year-old conflict.

Clinton's visit comes with American lawmakers increasingly questioning the course of the war as the death toll of U.S. and international forces rises and also expressing concerns about corruption and the utility of massive assistance to both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

She will attend next week's international conference in Kabul where the Afghan government is expected to outline plans to bolster deteriorating security conditions, reintegrate militants into society and crack down on corruption. She also will stop in Pakistan to push greater cooperation between Islamabad and Kabul.

Clinton, who leaves Saturday, also plans travel to South Korea, where she will meet up with Defense Secretary Robert Gates for talks on dealing with renewed tensions over North Korea after the sinking of a South Korean warship blamed on the North. She will finish in Vietnam for discussions with regional leaders likely to focus on upcoming elections in Myanmar.

U.S. officials are keeping specific details of her South Asia itinerary secret for security reasons but say she will lead the American delegation to the July 20 Kabul Conference. There she will renew Washington's commitment to support Afghan President Hamid Karzai's government but press him to follow through on reform pledges he made earlier this year.

Richard Holbrooke, President Barack Obama's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, has said the conference "will be a very important international demonstration of support" for Karzai and his administration.

But Holbrooke acknowledges concerns that the war and the reconstruction effort are not proceeding as hoped or planned.

He told Congress this week that "there are significant elements of movement forward in many areas, but I do not yet see a definitive turning point in either direction."

Last month was the deadliest of the war for international forces, with 103 coalition troops killed, despite the infusion of tens of thousands of new U.S. troops.

At the same time, international troops working with Afghan forces say they have killed or captured dozens of senior insurgent figures since April as they aggressively step up operations against the Taliban leadership. However, those successes haven't slowed the pace of militant attacks, which continue daily, killing dozens of people each month.

The administration has said it will review its Afghan strategy, which was announced last winter, at the end of this year. But slow progress against the Taliban, plus the disruptive effects of the firing of the outspoken American commander there last month, has stirred a growing unease among many in Congress, including leading members of Obama's own party.

While many lawmakers have raised concern about Obama's plan to begin withdrawing U.S. troops next year, some influential members of Congress also have begun to raise serious doubts about the way the war is proceeding, complicating the administration's effort to maintain support for the endeavor.

On Wednesday, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said it's not clear that the administration has a solid strategy for prevailing, and the panel's ranking Republican, Richard Lugar of Indiana, decried "a lack of clarity" about U.S. war goals.

And Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., has said that while there remains "solid support" for the war among Democrats, "there's also the beginnings of fraying of that support."

In the House, Rep. Nita Lowey, D-N.Y., has put a hold on nearly $4 billion in assistance to Afghanistan, demanding that allegations of corruption be addressed and that the Afghan government be held accountable.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

WASHINGTON — Amid growing concerns about the war in Afghanistan, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is heading to South Asia on a mission aimed at refining the goals of the nearly 9-year-...
WASHINGTON — Amid growing concerns about the war in Afghanistan, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton is heading to South Asia on a mission aimed at refining the goals of the nearly 9-year-...
Filed by Nicholas Sabloff  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 312
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (9 total)
11:22 PM on 07/18/2010
Hillary Clinton is very good woman, she is very smart for doing such good thing, she tries to communicate with international countries in order to be good friendships.
01:06 AM on 07/19/2010
Im a leftist and even I know that is pure TV contrived fantasyland. She is a corporate sellout like her peers and is more than willing to let people die in her wars. Her husband is now all of a sudden best friends with Daddy Bush, exCIA director and Bohemian Grove participant.
02:25 AM on 07/19/2010
a corporate sellout like Obama ?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dangerous Dan
Because I can!
11:13 PM on 07/18/2010
Freedom fighters explain why will never win, in their own words.

http://shock.military.com/Shock/videos.do?displayContent=156204
10:42 PM on 07/18/2010
The people see this bloody occupation as flushing trillions down the Pentagon toilet but our paternalistic pols think they know best. What do they know that we don't?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dangerous Dan
Because I can!
11:15 PM on 07/18/2010
What is.01% of a trillion?
Obama money.
In his stash.
10:40 PM on 07/18/2010
It is clear to most that it is time for Mrs. Clinton to step down as SoS. The only reason her failures are not on the front page is because of Obama who's failure is not legendary.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dangerous Dan
Because I can!
09:48 PM on 07/18/2010
She wants the Pakistani's to tighten up their border security!
Do you think the Pakistani's have a smart retort about Our border security claims?
What would Obama say? "We can not secure our borders."
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:38 PM on 07/18/2010
a lot of women yell pull out in bed , I am sure she is not the first women to them him that!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dolmance
07:46 PM on 07/18/2010
Our whole concept of war has been really limited by our victories in Europe and Japan during WWII. We don't have to occupy these countries, we don't have to hold onto territory. We could just build a single unassailable base with a giant clown head and send out drones to look for any developments we don't like and then blow it up remotely. We'd spend a lot less money, we wouldn't be putting our people in danger - we'd just monitor and explode, monitor and explode and keep on monitoring and exploding until whoever is running evil plots against us can't appear in the open, can't have freedom of movement and would be much happier by adhering to good behavior.

We could keep pouring on the hurt for a hundred years and it wouldn't even make for a hiccup in our economy or cost a single NATO life.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ramkshrestha
Lumbini-Kapilvastu Day Movement
07:08 PM on 07/18/2010
Effort must be with peace purpose rather than war.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wulidncr
Believe nothing. Question all. Love boundlessly
06:23 PM on 07/18/2010
Goal: Permanent war as an engine for redistributing and concentrating wealth upwards.

Assessment: Successful.

Next Goal: Continue as above.

Methodology: Propaganda, Emotionalism, GOP, Fox News, Wedge Issues.

Prognosis: Middle class reduced to frothing tea baggers, further wealth concentration plus the bonus of morose delectation (An instance in which someone experiences enjoyment on account of someone else's suffering.)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mixpiklix
08:13 PM on 07/18/2010
yes those repubs really love those no bid contract. hey joe send over 100,000 candy bars, no problem pete the bill 25,000,000 dollars no problem
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ngonyama
Major prolation, perfect mode
04:13 PM on 07/18/2010
In a country that has never been more than a loose tribal confederacy at best, should the goal really be to force everybody a corrupt centralized government down their throat, especially after the Russians tried the same?

Has the US forgotten that it too is a federal state or that a confederacy like the Swiss one works just fine for people, thank you very much?
04:04 PM on 07/18/2010
REFINING THE GOALS??? Just for f..king once in plain English tell us the US and the rest of the world what the hell ARE those goals.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DaMojo
"Death eatin' a biskit'
05:07 PM on 07/18/2010
Really! I hope she puts a 'gun to their heads' and tells them to get their act together or we leave them to their own chaos. Enough already.
05:27 PM on 07/18/2010
We invade a country on the basis of lies and WE tell them to get their act together? If you want chaos look no further than our own corrupt two party system, I don't blame them for fighting like hell to keep that from happening to them.
photo
Puller58
Man of Mystery
03:40 PM on 07/18/2010
There are a number of failed states in the world as well as rogue states that can harbor terrorists and their training camps. The only argument that can be made about AfPak is that leaving emboldens the terrorists, but I think they would be unfazed in either case.
04:07 PM on 07/18/2010
Just look south of the border to see one of the biggest failed states in the world being ran by narco-terrorists that are a REAL threat to this country and entire hemisphere.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dangerous Dan
Because I can!
09:55 PM on 07/18/2010
I'm sure that if we just open our southern border we would see a greater flow of US dollars across the border.
ProCynic
Weak minds become partisan, demonizing others.
03:25 PM on 07/18/2010
Can we just get out? Now? The only thing we are going is killing; Ours and theirs. Even if we stay for 20 years, the moment we leave, it will go back to civil war. Let's just get it over with.
outnow
Ban the bomb
02:19 PM on 07/18/2010
Many are rethinking how our goals in foreign policy might be advanced much more effectively and humanely that by continuing to use the barbaric practices of today. Granted, as any student of history will tell you, there have always been wars, but much more humane and effective ways are being considered to advance society's legitimate objectives that do not rely on high tech killing with high civilian casualties.

Our methods presently in use create a cycle of violence that is great if you can be in the flow of money that the security state provides for defense contractors, security firms and munitions suppliers, etc. If your firm can make billions each year, you cannot be objective about the issue of security and/or defense.

Ike Eisenhower was able to name the hungry beast - the MIC. They are the best advertisement for recruiting those desperate people who are the victims of drones and rockets and missiles intended for others. At present, religion can be used to spur conflict upon demand. That brings to power the group who lead Jihads.

Our influence and power lies in education to change attitudes, values and beliefs and to influence economic changes that include more people in the benefits, not just those who wish to steal resources in foreign lands. When the benefits are broadly shared, the locals tend to go along because they share more equitably.

Turning everyone against everyone else and using military force all over is stupid and criminal.
01:31 PM on 07/18/2010
I think Clinton knows what she says. Has influence in Washington and there should be taken into account. I think while that is an honest woman.auto hibride http://www.auto-my.ro